RSS
There is joy in the air. That joy is misplaced.
For that joy might kill us.
I set down these words on the 9th of March in Manhattan. Historically, the average temperature on this day of the year is 40 degrees Fahrenheit. If the weather forecast for today, March 9, 2021, is correct — and at this writing, it looks like it will be — the temperature will hit 61 degrees F.
“Today is going to be a beautiful day,” the radio said this morning.
Everyone is happy. People are making plans to eat outside, go running, walking, whatever. Everyone in New York who can break away from work or other obligations is determined to enjoy today’s “good weather.”
I feel it, too. I have a meeting after I finish writing this. The sun will feel sweet on my face. More people will be smiling; even if I have to surmise that from the twinkle in their eyes above a mask, their pleasure in this good weather will be infectious.
We have got to stop thinking about warm, sunny, hotter-than-usual weather as positive. Weather isn’t climate. But hotter-than-usual weather multiplied out, repeated as it has been for years, reflects the existential threat of climate change. Hotter-than-usual weather repeated over time is killing coral and plants, extinguishing animal species. It will ultimately kill us, and if not us, our children, and if not them, our grandchildren. I have not yet met my grandchild, but I don’t want my grandchild, or yours, to die before he or she has his or her own grandchildren.
We’ve been greeting “beautiful days,” i.e., hotter-than-usual days, by putting on tank tops, grabbing picnic baskets and heading to the park. This is understandable. This is insane.
Celebrating a hotter-than-usual day makes as much sense as a Frenchman jumping for joy at the sight of invading German troops. Sparkling blue, cloudless skies are harbingers of doom. The soft scent of your own sweat under a gentle sun in midwinter is a death sentence handed down by a judge whose rulings cannot be appealed. When you hear that it’s going to be 61 degrees in Manhattan in March, you should be scared to death.
There are, if you pay attention, signs that everything is wrong. Trees whose first buds appeared in late April now pop out in February, fresh leaves frozen off as the weather turns cold again, though not as cold nor for as long as it should. Asthmatics, those human canaries, suffer from “spring” allergies all “winter” long. There are so few birds.
The proper response to one too many hotter-than-usual days in midwinter — for that matter, it is also an appropriate way to greet a series of hotter-than-usual days in summer — is fear. We are on the way out. We are killing ourselves. This is seriously messed up.
Anger follows fear. We should hate the ecocidal maniacs who are too greedy and stupid to see that their relentless quest for short-term corporate profits is murdering us. We should despise the politicians who sell us out to these psychos. We should be ashamed of ourselves for tolerating both sets of crazies.
Unless we are idiots, action should come next, and damned soon. The truly great thing about a 61-degree day in New York City in March (in March! ) is that it makes it more enticing for hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers together in public spaces to protest and demand sanity from their overlords. There are no winter coats or cold-stiffened bones to stop demonstrators from hurling tear gas canisters back at the cops.
Saving ourselves must begin with a mental shift.
There is, as an older gentleman who drove me in his taxi told me a couple of years ago, no good weather or bad weather. There is only weather. To a farmer, rain is often welcome. To which I would add, given the context of global warming, there is only appropriate weather — appropriate to its time and place and based on the assumption, which needs to become true if we want to live, that the human race is no longer affecting that weather.
An 80-degree day at the South Pole might be pleasant for sunbathing scientists. But it would be radically inappropriate regardless of the time of year. A 20-degree day in Bali might be fun for Indonesians who’ve never been in a snowball fight. But it would be wildly wrong, allowing for normal variations of high and low.
I come to you in praise of “bad” weather. On the 9th of March, New Yorkers ought to be happy to see sleet. They should smile at their neighbors as they tiptoe through filthy slush puddles pooled at the street corners. Climate change has turned the world topsy-turvy; in a topsy-turvy world, good weather is bad and bad weather is good.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
The Dimming
Full Length Climate Engineering Documentary (Geoengineering Watch)
Video Link
Here in Texas we had people dying in sub zero temps quite recently. I hope my grand children don’t freeze to death. Tomorrow, Saturday, the high is expected to reach 78 degrees. The agreeable weather will bring happy Texans out to my Flea Market booth. They will be talking about what a “nice” day it is. What’s so fucking nice about it – I will say. Don’t you know we are all gonna die?
Two famous figures now in touch on Ted Rall’s ‘climate change crisis’?
78 degrees?
The Texas March average is 69 -49, so maybe a bit high.
Where I live we had the coolest summer for 20 odd years…. don’t ask me??
I guess it’s the averages over decades that count?
YAWN.
If I were a capitalist at the top of my game, I’d invent Climate Change too.
I mean, why go to the bother of inventing new stuff that will benefit mankind and make me even more fabulously wealthy, when I can simply charge THREE TIMES what I used to charge for the old stuff?
When you’re in the business of making money – why sell low when you can sell HIGH?
All you need is some easily bought legislators, a good PR team and a future (invented) catastrophe that’s always just around the corner…
KERCHING!
If I were in the armaments/security business, I’d invent multiple enemies at home and abroad who are always just around the corner and demand ever larger public budgets to never-quite-defeat them because SAFETY comes at a price, right?
KERCHING!
If I were in the Big Pharma business, I’d convince the world that seasonal flu is more deadly than Ebola and unless we lockdown the entire planet and vaccinate everyone with MY rather expensive yet not-exactly-approved arm-jabby-job then YOU ARE ALL GONNA DIE!
KERCHING!
There’s a new Sucker born every minute, same as the old Suckers and just as easy to fleece.
All you need is some easily bought legislators, a good PR team and a future (invented) catastrophe that’s always just around the corner… but it’s the easily bought legislators who are KEY because they might try close you down. (Yes, Try It and see where it gets you Mr Ghadaffi ;o)
Which is why the fight to spread Democracy all over the world must never end!
Now, who cares what the weather doing, it’s not like anyone can control it (what do you think I am, a Magician?) But, there’s lots of money in the air and it pays for sh1t like this!
Good point, but when winter stretches into forever, with 30 below temps, I’m overcome with joy, when our first spring-like days occur. Manhattan provides distractions throughout winter, but not here. Out here, if you said sleet is welcome, after a long winter, even our local antifa would demand that you be locked up into a psych ward.
Unfortunately, too many people on the right side of things are wrong about global warming. Ocean temperatures have been steadily rising over the past 100 years. That’s a better measure of global warming than variable atmospheric measurements, because the specific heat capacity of liquid water is 4 times higher than air, and the air’s mass is a tiny fraction of the mass of the world’s oceans (about 1/143000), and it’s doesn’t gain/lose heat as easily as the atmosphere. If you look at ocean temperatures, global warming is occurring. The National Academy of Sciences says we are in a 6th extinction event. So, maybe we should dread Spring, but not me.
Every graph of historic CO2 levels and temperature plotted on a long time line clearly show that temperatures rise first, followed by CO2 rise about 800 years later.
The whole CO2 causes a rise in temperature nonsense is disputed by data and yet we have people claiming that it does.
And diversity is strength.
THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!
This article is a prime example of brain disease.
Ted. In the 1930s America was hotter than it is now.
In the 1910s, 10s of thousands of people in Europe dropped dead from the extraordinary heat.
Your grandchildren will be just fine, Teddy. That is unless you are unable to reproduce due to your having no balls.
Try to be a man, Ted. Stop hiding under your bed.
Trees whose first buds appeared in late April now pop out in February, fresh leaves frozen off as the weather turns cold again
I feel this is made up evidence. Nowhere in the US has the onset of spring advanced by two months. What trees? Where? How was the evidence gathered?
There are no deciduous trees in the northeast whose leaves would freeze and fall with a late frost. Edges turn brown? Maybe. Flowers killed and fruit production stunted? Yes. Leaves killed by a late frost? Doesn’t happen.
Other points: Spring comes sooner to Central Park. Winter and spring temperatures are more volatile than summer and fall.
Learning a science is a deeply humbling experience. You learn the non-rigorous narratives and opinions that you’ve formed by lazy thinking are nonsense. It’s also humbling because almost every scientific field is immense. You can only learn a slice, even though you spend years studying it. Opinions are ok in politics, liberal arts, philosophy, gender and racial studies, and softer sciences, but not in the hard sciences. Every analysis requires rigorous thought that goes through peer review. Anyone is welcome to dispute research in those fields, through the peer-reviewed journals that form the consensus and discussions of research. If you aren’t a participant in this climate field (I’m not), it’s best to defer to that consensus. The present consensus is that global warming is occurring.
With respect, everything you know about ‘climate change’ is wrong – and I’m not just talking about Ted Rall.
Could massive amounts of carbon dioxide injected into the atmosphere be a bad idea? Sure. But right now, most of what is ascribed to ‘climate change’ is really due to massive population growth – said growth typically the result of elitist policy.
Consider Syria. A small arid country that depends on storying water in aquifers to tide it over the dry spells. The government insisted it was everyone’s patriotic duty to have seven kids each, they duly obliged, the population doubled in 18 years, and quadrupled in 36 years, and then… oopsie! The water ran out and things fell apart.
So here’s the bottom line: the long-term trend of precipitation on Syria has been stable. The population was quadrupled. Water supply per capita was cut to a quarter. The aquifers were drained. CO2-mediated climate change might indeed be a long term threat, but it simply could not be the problem with Syria – or (for now) with virtually all such ‘climate change’ alleged catastrophes.
‘Climate change’ is a fraud designed to distract us from real issues – like forced population growth – and as an excuse for massive regressive tax increases on the working classes.
If you want to see an example of how to really fight ‘climate change,’ consider Canada. Until recently, with a population of about 25 million, and vast resources, even though per-capita energy consumption was higher than the US, the ecological impact of Canda was negligible. We can’t have that! The rich are currently using the surplus population of the third world to force Canada’s population growth upwards, to at least a hundred million and likely much more. ‘Overpopulation’ is not due to lack of government family planning policies, it is due to government policies aimed at maximizing population growth!
Now as Canada’s population is increased, the per-capita resource consumption of the average Canadian will be driven steadily downwards, but the overall ecological impact of Canada will be radically increased.
But ‘climate change’ somehow doesn’t matter when the rich are looking to make more money from all that lovely cheap labor, right?
Per capita consumption in India is basically at substance, but with 1.4 billion people on 1/3 the land of the US, the ecological impact is huge.
If the world HAD BEEN ALLOWED to develop like Canada, ‘climate change’ would not be an issue.
If the world is FORCED (or merely tricked) to develop like India, the planet will be strip mined and perhaps soon become uninhabitable.
THAT is the issue.
“And diversity is strength”
Said the empty chested, black on the inside actress to the Monarch!
Yes, the British Monarchy clearly ARE RACIST – because no WHITE girl with such a poor social and professional CV would ever have been allowed within 5000 miles of the former Prince Harry, let alone, date, then given permission to marry him.
And now they are paying for it.
There’s a reason that Eskimos don’t eat yellow snow.
As a customer of NETFLIX – I demand that they sue Megan and Harry for Fraud.
She sold herself as a Powerful, intelligent, educated Female with a Voice who could empower others.
She made OPRAH hundreds of millions of dollars by admitting that she is a mentally challenged, ignorant grubber, too lazy to do her own homework, yet who demands Respect and the tiaras of her choice from the Royal Collection – or she’ll WALK!
WHY SHOULD NETFLIX and SPOTIFY customers pay for her exuberant lifestyle when she admits that she is a LAZY, MENTALLY ILL FRAUD?
Too bad that the British Monarchy discovered too late like almost EVERY other Western Institution who made the same mistake that;
Diversity Divides.
Diversity Destroys
Diversity is a Trojan Horse…
We’re told that there can be No safe spaces in the USA for RACISTS…
I wonder what the former Prince Harry’s “Little P@KI Friend” thinks of that?
*** Bets Please that like Diana, Mrs Markel soon suffers an accident on “the stairs”?
I’m glad that I am NOT her insurers (or her SECOND husband)
Why don’t you try pointing the blame in the right direction?
Studies indicate that China is producing one third of total greenhouse gases, surrounding South Asian countries are producing another third, the U.S. is producing 15%, and Russia, Europe, India, and the rest of the world’s nations are producing the remainder.
In short, even if we eliminated ALL greenhouse gases in the U.S., and bankrupted ourselves in the process, we wouldn’t stop the world’s production of greenhouse gases.
In order to stop the production of greenhouse gases, we would have to persuade or force China and South Asian nations to stop. Fat chance, short of global thermonuclear war, which would occasion its own problems.
Please get real here, and address the real issues.
If you really like science, and if you ever learned but one sciency thing, you should know this very simple fact:
There is no such thing as consensus in science! As a matter of fact, nearly every single advance in human knowledge stems from proving somebody’s “final solution” to be wrong.
Science happens because someone somewhere doubts the “consensus” truth, and sets out to prove them all wrong.
Also, and I say this with all the love in my heart, Wikipedia is a very good resource to find proper resources, but in itself, it has long been shown (by evidence, not consensus) that the original dream of open-source free information has been supplanted by Bolshevik propaganda, Globalist business interests and just plain censorious propaganda by those who have convinced you and a lot of other people about the existence of the very unscientific bull concerning “scientific consensus”.
Before you swear at me, go find out where exactly the mythological incantation of “93% of scientists agree on manmade global warming” comes from. Hint: it was a childish little questionaire sent to hundreds of weather men, of whom less than a hundred bothered to respond, and just over 90 answered “yes” to a rather silly and open-ended question. Upon that, they built the false edifice of academic respectability you decided to consensus-worship.
Learning science should not be humbling, it is empowering, you are obviously doing it wrong! Not because you are stupid, but because you use Wikipedia as your only resource. Here’s a better one:
wattsupwiththat.com
Boo-fucking-hoo for NYC. NYC is no part of my country anymore, no blue state is. Leave them all to the mother-loving rats and blacks to feed on the whites. Lower case whites in this example.
The temperature increase causes melting in Greenland which adds huge amounts of fresh cold water in the area. Eventually this shuts down the Atlantic Conveyor that brings warm equatorial water up north and the northern areas get colder. Once the Atlantic Conveyor stops significantly, it takes a long time to get it to restart and that time frame results in a frozen northern hemisphere.
The mass of water takes a long time to react and the length of the ice age is that reaction time to re balance. The key is the Atlantic Conveyor and getting it to restart.
Once an area of research has to rely on a consensus to state a result, that area of research is a fraud and the people doing the research have no empirical evidence to back up their bald assertions.
One can have a theory, a gut level feel, an instinct about what might be going on in any given area, but it takes empirical evidence to turn a theory into a fact or to understand why the theory was faulty.
Consensus is for the bullshit artist specialties like sociology, psychiatry, psychology, etc, not hard sciences. The hard sciences want verifiable evidence, not the say so of some priesthood.
You have to laugh at this dumb shit.
Yes, that’s one of the paradoxes of global warming. It might lead to global cooling. During the Ordovician geological period (about 450 million years ago), global air temperatures averaged 120 F (not highs, the average!), while ocean temperatures reached 110F. CO2 levels were 12-14 times higher than today. Surprisingly, that rapid increase in CO2, paradoxically lead to global cooling. Those high temps led to immense storms and immense erosion. The erosion of silicate rocks leads to chemical reactants with the CO2, removing much CO2. That’s seems to be the prevailing theory, but not the only theory. Then, glaciation of nearly the whole planet occurred, causing the Ordovician-Silurian extinction event — the 2nd largest of the five past mass extinction events.
The present global warming might cause global cooling through the reduction of the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation that you mentioned (it’s down 15% and falling) and then global cooling, or it might lead to global warming as methane is released. Like the Ordovician event, the only certainty is change will occur. In the case of the Ordovician, it was a catastrophic change. But, there are also biological equilibrium cycles in rivers, streams, lakes, the land, and the oceans that are affected by this change. What will happen to them is unknown. To me, its best to err on the side of caution and stop this global change.
No one can stop the global change because the humans are not in charge, the sun and the cosmos in general is.
The fact that geologists and others have figured out that rapid warming results in an ice age on periodic cycles that occurred well before humans existed should tell anyone without an agenda that these are natural cycles that we must live through, not try to control.
Global warming is a tiny phase in the very long cycle and it appears we’re approaching the end of it. Instead of coming up with hubristic and ridiculous geoengineering efforts that can later compound the problem, we should recognize that we are pawns in this game and try to minimize any negative effects as best we can.
The political class may be stupid enough to believe the bullshit they’re spreading; I don’t doubt that. However, real scientists shouldn’t give into the consensus fraud as though the climate scientists (sic) know what they’re talking about. That area of scientific investigation is so primitive that those folks should just shut up and allow the more senior sciences to look at the issues and suggest policies to keep us all alive regardless of which way the temperatures are going.
From my perspective, all the CO2 nonsense needs to stop and we should be worrying about how we’re going to feed the worlds people as growing regions rapidly shift. Putting policies in place when we don’t KNOW if it’s going to get hotter or colder in the next dozen years that pick one direction is insane. Attempting to change that direction is the height of hubris.
This February was the coldest one in 7 years, due to the Pacific currents generating La Nina.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9365217/Earth-coolest-February-seven-years-La-Ni-tropical-Pacific-Ocean.html